Connect with us

Opinion

The Oracle: Nigeria in Search of Enduring Political Structure: Imperative of Structural Reform (Pt. 4)

Published

on

Leaderboard Ad

By Mike Ozekhome

INTRODUCTION

In the last part of this discussion, after posing the question: Have we really been doomed? We answered it in the negative and went ahead to highlight notable achievements by Nigerians. We wondered whether Nigeria is a failed State. In this episode, we shall consider the phenomenon of insecurity in Nigeria and how it laid waste to large swathes of Nigeria and rendered its governments (particularly states) prostrate. Read on.

INSECURITY REIGNS SUPREME

In terms of security, Nigeria is becoming a killing field. The daily slaughter ritual in Nigeria that has turned the Nigerian geographical space into a killing field is not only criminal, but also smacks of total abdication of governance by the current government. It is most cruel, hideous, horrific, inhuman, dastardly and barbaric. The latest theatre of the absurd is Plateau state, where hundreds of innocent and helpless Nigerians, especially the most vulnerable (children, women and elderly), have been mindlessly hacked down in cold blood. Nigerians have become “walking corpses” or “the living dead” (apologies, AyiKwei Armah: “The Beautiful Ones Are not yet Born”). The government that appears overtly overwhelmed (if it ever cared at all), wrings its hands in utter helplessness and blames everything and any one, but itself. PMB says he can only pray to God for miracles. The Commander-in-Chief (C-in–C) in saying this, breaks the heart and freely donates to the citizens, helplessness and hopelessness. What is the military there for, since the Police has been overrun? Sections 130 (2) and 215 (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as altered, make the President the C-in-C of both the Armed Forces and the Police. Never before, or after the three year bloody Nigerian fratricidal civil war has Nigeria witnessed such barefaced butchery of innocent souls in a most horrendous manner that portends ethnic cleansing and genocidal tendencies.

The entire security architecture of Nigeria has been greatly compromised and doctored. The Nigerian Constitution (section 14 (2) (b), makes the welfare and security of lives and property the primary purpose of government. Any government that cannot protect its citizens is not worth being called a government by any description or appellation. We have become a laughing stock before international circles. We make merriment and hold political rallies on the cold graves of hot steaming blood of innocent Nigerians. We wanted to win the world cup at all cost, amidst vengeful slaughter of fellow Nigerians. But, God is a just and righteous God. He does not tolerate injustice, wickedness. He does not condone unearned adulation and hero-worshipping: The Bible: Job 34:12; Col 3:25; Deut 10:18; 32:4; Isaiah 30:18. The Holy Quran: 5:8; 16:90; 59: 22-24. Die hard politicians are already busy, politicking about 2019, while our citizens are daily massacred in cold blood. A governor that is supposed to be the Chief Security Officer of his state is nothing but a mere toothless crying bulldog, having been stripped of such luxury of controlling powers by sections 215 (4) of the Constitution. This section enthrones a behemoth, elephantine and immobile Police Force at the center, with the governor at the mercy of the IGP and president. That is why I have, over the years, consistently and persistently clamoured for true fiscal federalism that allows for state Police and community policing. From Agatu, Naka and Agasha in Benue state, Demsa, Suwa and Burukulu in Adamawa state, Riyom, BarkinLadi and Jos in Plateau state, to Birnin-Gwari, Dangaji, UnguwarGajere in Kaduna State; from Izza, Wudula, Blakule and Darajimal in Borno State; to Takum, Shaakaa, Donga and Ntule in Taraba State; to Maraban –Udege Village, Aisa and Aguma in Nassarawa State; from Ugbona, Okpella, Odiguetue and Igiode in Edo State, Nigeria knows no peace. Things have fallen apart. The falcon can no longer hear the falconer.

Even in Uwheru, Oreba, Ovwor, Onicha-Olona and Abraka in Delta State; to Okpanku, Ozzala, UkpabiNimbo, Ngwoko, Ebor, Umuome, Ugwuijoro and Ugwuachara in Enugu State, the story is the same: gory and hideous blood-letting and festival of blood. The greatest worry of it all is that these killers are not ghosts or apparitions. They are known. They even come out openly, thump their chests, confess and own up to their criminal acts. The Herdsmen umbrella, Miyetti-Allah, claimed the blood-chilling murder of over 200 Plateau citizens was because 300 of its cows were rustled. It boasted that no one could have expected peace without retaliation, under such circumstances. The same group has, over time, infamously given various reasons for its herdsmen’s killings: Nimbo massacre, Enugu State (deadly attack): “we killed because they stole our cows”. Benue State (several progroms): “we killed because of anti-grazing law”. Taraba State (several): “we killed because they blocked our grazing routes”. Adamawa State (many Communities): “we killed because they broke our cow’s leg”. Zamfara State: “we killed because the farmers said we were grazing on their farm lands”. Haba!

A PROSTRATE GOVERNMENT

Nearly seven years down the line, there have been no arrests, no prosecution, no arraignment, no convictions. Rather, some five Christians were arrested in Adamawa, tried and sentenced to death by hanging, for allegedly killing one Fulani herdsman. Some lives are now more precious than others. Rather than kill cow for meal to celebrate occasions, as we know it, we now kill human beings to celebrate cows. The government not only looks the other way, but actually condones the heartless cold-blooded slaughter. Nigeria cannot continue like this. The federal government must rise up to the occasion, draft military personnel to these volatile areas and wash its hands off, like Pontius Pilate, of compromise, condonation, aiding and abetting, of this national horror. The saddest and deepest of all the national cuts and travesty of justice is that there is no one to complain to. The president himself, the very C–in–C, who had promised to lead from the front during his campaigns in 2015, wrings his hands in utter helplessness, and moans (like any of us):“There is nothing I can do to help the situation except to pray to God to help us out of the security challenges”.

Interpretation: “I am helpless; Be prepared to take what you get”. But, the Holy Bible tells us that “God helps those who help themselves” (Hezekiah 6:1). In 2 Thessalonians 3:10, we are admonished that “the one who is unwilling to work shall not eat”. In the Holy Quran, it is, “Allah helps those who help themselves” 13:11; (Tafsir of Chapter 022 verse 40). Is the president being fed the true and genuine situation of horrific and grisly events across Nigeria? Can he, when virtually all his security apparatchik consists of nepotic and cronystic appointees from his ethnic and religious groups only: Minister of Defence, Minister of Interior, Chief of Army Staff, Chief of Air Staff, IGP, DSS, EFCC, Immigration, Customs, NSCDC, Prisons, NSA, C of S, etc, etc? Are we in the Fulani Republic of Nigeria, or Republic of Northern Nigeria?

The non-prosecution of these marauding herdsmen has emboldened them to commit more crimes. Daily carnage and spilling of innocent blood have become the norm. Nigerians now appear unshockable. Many lamentably try to justify this modern day genocide with partisan political interpretations, pretending all is well. Meanwhile, Nigeria dies by installment. Most Nigerians have become more cowardly than ever before, afraid even of their own shadows. Nigerians should stand and speak up before we are all eclipsed in dismemberment. Reasonating voices appear suddenly mute. Where is the “Occupy Nigeria” group that vehemently protested against GEJ across Nigeria, especially in Lagos and Abuja. Even PMB had himself joined them. Where is General Yakubu Gowon and his praying Orchestral? Where is the voice of gap-toothed IBB? What of roving Ambassador, General Abdusallam Abubakar? Where is GEJ’s voice (even if he will be accused of partisanship, having lost the last elections)? Where are the human rights activists, emergency NGOs proprietors, CSOs, FBOs, etc? I cannot hear the voice of strong willed Ebitu Ukiwe? Where is respected Col. Dangiwa?

Why is everyone keeping silent when Nigeria is sliding towards totalitarianism, absolutism and even fascism? May God forbid “Ruandanization” of our already beleaguered contraption called Nigeria. Perhaps, to prick government’s conscience on the daily butchery of innocent Nigerians in their homes and farms, and the consequential seizure and renaming of their ancestral communities, we should implement the recent suggestion of my good friend, Senator Shehu Sani. He said: “We need a graveyard in the three arms zone of Abuja so that victims of the mindless killings in the country can be buried close to the seat of power. Then the Executive, Legislators & the Judiciary can feel the pains of the helpless widows and orphans we failed to protect.” Nigerians are crying. There is lamentation in the land. There is gnashing of teeth. Melancholy, despondency, hopelessness and regrets stare people in the face. These times are frightening.

Public trust that had initially been ballooned to a myth and anchored on the dizzying height of change mantra and PMB’s much touted integrity, has since considerably dwindled to a near zero level. Hear the sorrowful dirge of a victim of the Plateau genocide, Paul Wyom Zakka: “They told us to go to the farms because they could not provide us with jobs. We went to the farms without knowing that our produce were meant to feed their cows. When the cows came, we stopped them from destroying our farm produce; Today, they kill us daily so their cows can feed.” Thomas Jefferson, American president from 1801 to 1809, once famously said: “Does the government fear us? Or do we fear the government? When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government”.

From the forgoing it can be seen that, in the words of Sulaimon Olanrewaju (lanresulaimon@yahoo.com), Nigeria is a paradox; so wealthy, yet so poor; so endowed, yet so deprived. Nigeria makes more money than many countries of the world but is unfortunately ranked among the poorest because many Nigerians live below the poverty line as they earn less than two dollars a day. According to the Brookings Institution in a report, The Start of a New Poverty Narrative, Nigeria is now home to the highest number of people living in extreme poverty on the globe. Similarly, a United Nations report on Nigeria’s Common Country Analysis, says youth unemployment is 42 per cent, while the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) puts the number of out of school children at over 10.5million. Infant mortality rate is 85.8 of 1000 live births, while the country has the highest rate of under-five mortality in the world. Malnutrition prevalence, according to the UN, ranges between approximately 46.9 per cent in the South West to 74.3 per cent in North West and North East.” (To be continued).

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“A restructuring of an organization and or society is always a difficult time and delicate”. (Toto Wolff).

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

AKPoti-AKPabio Saga: Standing Justice on Its Head

Published

on

By

Leaderboard Ad

By Ayo Oyoze Baje

“There are several court rulings, including that of the Court of Appeal, each of which deems it illegal to suspend an elected member of the legislature. The recent suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti – Uduaghan is therefore, the height of legislative recklessness” – Femi Falana SAN 

When and where might – is – right, as amply demonstrated by the recent outrageous and illegal suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, representing Kogi Central Senatorial District at the Red Chamber – without salary or allowances – it does not only question the authority on which the lawmakers stand to carry out their statutory functions but ridicules the manner of democracy we practise here in Nigeria. And if the wrong done is not righted within the shortest possible time, it goes further to de-brand our so called democratic structure that places overt power of the jungle mantra of might – is – right on the elected representatives of the people above the wishes of the led majority. That indeed, is both an aberration and a legislative anomaly, triggered by the senator’s suspension, hence the outrage it has so far evolved. But let us first take an objective analysis of the drama that led to the development.

Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan ‘s suspension took place after she submitted a petition alleging being sexually harassed by the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio. After dismissing her petition on procedural ground the Ethics Committee, as led by Neda Imasuen ( Labour Party, Edo South) recommended her suspension for six months claiming that she brought ”

public opprobrium” to the Upper Chamber of the National Assembly. Though some members wanted the suspension reduced to three months, 14 members of the Committee stood by their decision, insisting that Natasha did not attend the investigative hearing to defend herself. In fact, they went further to ask her to tender an apology to the same Senate President Akpabio she has accused of sexual harassment, for her outburst during the plenary session!

Expectedly, the steamy situation has sparked off some flaming questions with regards to the rule of law under such circumstances. For instance, is it not her inalienable right to reject the sitting arrangement, which was surreptitiously meant to relegate her to the legislative shadows? Good enough, the answer is not far -fetched. According to Natasha’s legal counsel, Victor Giwa the Nigerian constitution of 1999, (as amended) supersedes the Senate’s Standing Orders. Specifically, Section 6, Sub-Section (6) of that constitution grants every citizen the right to seek redress in court when their civil rights are violated. Incidentally, she has done so, with her knowledge of the law.

The next question has to do with the best of ways to handle a delicate matter such as this. Should the matter not have been made open by placing it before an independent panel, to investigate and make recommendations in the interest of justice? That is, instead of slamming Natasha for having the gut, the temerity and audacity to express her complaints at the Senate chamber? According to Giwa the suspension of his client is definitely a brazen attempt to silence her. But unfortunately, for those behind it all it has only emboldened her to seek for justice going through the right process. In Giwa’s words: “The Committee disobeyed a valid court order that was served on them, making a mockery of the chamber that is supposed to uphold the law”. That should serve as food-for-thought for the masterminds behind the illegal suspension of the senator.

That perhaps, aptly explains why the Nigeria Bar Association ( NBA) has slammed the Senate by not giving her, the complainant to present her sexual harassment claim against Akpabio. That reminds us of the odious ” off the mic ” scenario that has played out each time an issue of public interest is being denied an objective investigation. The lawmakers, especially those who are bent on attempting to paper over cracks, or give a person a bad name to hang him or her must be reminded that there is a court order restraining the Senate from taking an action on the matter, pending the determination of of s motion on notice. The mishandling of the matter at hand by the senators is what has emboldened Natasha’s lawyer, Giwa to declare her suspension as ” null and void”. Yet, he is not the only person to outrightly condemn the illegality that has evolved so far.

The world acclaimed Women Rights activist, Hadiza Ado described Natasha’s suspension as amounting to a “,sad day for Nigerian women”. On its part the Socio–Economic Rights and Accountability Project ( SERAP ) has described it as “patently unlawful”and a clear violation of her right to freedom of speech. The organization has therefore, called on the Senate President Akpabio to reinstate her without further delay or face their legal action against such oddity. Similarly, the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP to which Natasha belongs has described as her suspension as am attempt by the Senate ” to cover up an issue”. That is according to the National Publicity Secretary, Debbo Ologunagba.So, what really could it be?

It would be recalled that on February 28, 2025 right on ARISE television, Natasha made a bold allegation of sexual harassment against the Senate President Akpabio.While some concerned Nigerians wondered why she went as far as that point of publicity, others knowing fully well about her background as an Ihima- born lady brought up with high moral standards would not kowtow to, be cowed by anyone, or acquiesce to the weird and wild emotional inclinations of a man for whatever reasons.

So, as the AKPoti -AKPabio saga rolls out, the lesson to learn is for people to always strike the delicate balance between the Motive and the Method of our utterances and actions. And of course, the brand we want to be recognized and stand for in our chequered journeys on Planet Earth. Of great significance also is the piece of admonition by Natasha’s legal counsel, Giwa, that: ” The Senate must abide by international best practices” all because the world is watching us.

Continue Reading

Opinion

The Trump-Vance Approach to Zelensky and the Emergence of a New World Order

Published

on

By

Leaderboard Ad

By Magnus Onyibe

During his visit to the White House on Friday, February 28, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky faced a tough reception from President Donald J. Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance. Their handling of him demonstrated their firm approach to diplomacy, signaling a shift in global power dynamics.

As the saying goes, a beggar has no choice—their hand is always beneath that of the giver, not above it. This principle was clearly reinforced when President Trump made it explicit that Ukraine had little say in negotiations regarding the resolution of the ongoing three-year war with Russia. Initial discussions had already taken place in Saudi Arabia without Ukraine or European nations at the table. Instead, the negotiations involved Saudi Arabia, the U.S., and Russia.

In response, Zelensky expressed his frustration:

“It feels like the U.S. is now discussing the ultimatum that Putin set at the start of the full-scale war. Once again, decisions about Ukraine are being made without Ukraine. I wonder why they believe Ukraine would accept all these ultimatums now if we refused them at the most difficult moment.”

Similarly, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer voiced concerns over Trump and Vance’s strategy of excluding Europe from the discussions:

“Nobody wants the bloodshed to continue, least of all the Ukrainians. But after everything that they have suffered, after everything they have fought for, there can be no discussion about Ukraine without Ukraine, and the people of Ukraine must have a long-term, secure future.”

However, the reality is that Zelensky is in no position to dictate terms. This was emphasized when Vice President Vance rebuked him during the Oval Office meeting:

“Mr. President, with respect, I think it’s disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office to try to litigate this in front of the American media.”

Trump had long accused Zelensky of being a shrewd negotiator who, during Biden’s presidency, would visit Washington and leave with massive financial aid. Determined to change this dynamic, Trump made it clear that such a practice would not continue under his administration. Summarizing the meeting, he stated:

“We had a very meaningful meeting in the White House today. Much was learned that could never be understood without conversation under such fire and pressure. It’s amazing what comes out through emotion, and I have determined that President Zelensky is not ready for peace if America is involved because he feels our involvement gives him a big advantage in negotiations. I don’t want advantage, I want PEACE.”

Trump went further, saying:

“He disrespected the United States of America in its cherished Oval Office. He can come back when he is ready for peace.”

By securing a deal that would grant the U.S. control over some of Ukraine’s rare earth resources as repayment for previous military aid, Trump demonstrated his negotiation skills. This approach mirrors historical precedents, such as Kuwait compensating the U.S. with oil after being liberated from Iraq in 1990 and Europe repaying America for the post-World War II Marshall Plan by allowing the formation of NATO under U.S. leadership.

The war itself stems from Ukraine’s desire to join NATO, which Russia perceived as a threat, prompting the invasion. Biden’s administration rallied U.S. allies to support Ukraine, possibly influenced by Biden’s personal connections—especially considering that Zelensky previously shielded Biden’s son, Hunter, from scrutiny over alleged financial misconduct in Ukraine. This decision may have played a role in Biden’s election victory in 2020, sparing him political damage from Trump’s opposition research.

However, Zelensky’s alignment with one side of U.S. politics carried risks. Hunter Biden’s business dealings eventually came under investigation, leading to his conviction, though his father pardoned him before leaving office. Some speculate that Biden’s support for Ukraine was a way of repaying Zelensky, providing him with financial and military backing against Russia.

This led Ukraine into a protracted war, with devastating consequences. Europe, drawn into the conflict through NATO, has suffered economic strain due to sanctions on Russian energy, with Germany experiencing economic downturns and the UK entering a recession. Africa has also been affected, as food shortages have worsened due to disruptions in wheat exports from Ukraine and Russia.

Had former President Barack Obama acted in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea, this war might have been avoided. However, Obama, who prioritized ending wars rather than starting them, resisted calls for military action, despite pressure from figures like then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Ironically, Biden, who was Obama’s vice president at the time, later led Ukraine into a war that his former boss had deliberately avoided.

With around 400,000 Ukrainians killed or wounded and much of the country’s infrastructure in ruins, the war has proven catastrophic. As Trump attempts to broker peace, it remains uncertain whether Zelensky will adapt to the new realities of U.S. foreign policy. Unlike the previous administration, Trump and Vance do not view Ukraine as a victim but as a country that must make concessions to secure peace.

Trump has already played a key role in de-escalating the Gaza conflict, and a similar approach could be applied to Ukraine. However, for this to happen, Zelensky must recognize that the geopolitical landscape has shifted and that the U.S. will no longer provide unconditional support. If Ukraine truly seeks peace, its leadership must engage with the new administration on its own terms.

The cold reception President Trump gave to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was evident when he labeled him a dictator and accused him of starting the war—though he later jokingly retracted the statement, expressing disbelief that he had said it. This exchange took place in response to reporters’ questions on the matter.

Trump’s firm stance signaled a shift from past U.S. support, and Zelensky might have adjusted his approach accordingly, handling the new White House administration with more caution. However, he chose a more assertive approach and was met with strong pushback from Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance. The two leaders discarded diplomatic formalities and sternly reprimanded Zelensky for what they perceived as arrogance regarding global security and an attempt to exploit perceived U.S. vulnerabilities—something they were unwilling to tolerate.

Through their bold policies, which are reshaping international relations, Trump and Vance are clearly dismantling the old world order and crafting a new one. This is evident in Trump’s imposition of steep tariffs on U.S. trading partners, a move that is redefining alliances worldwide. Simultaneously, he is pushing for a swift resolution to conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine—wars he insists would never have started under his leadership. Despite domestic political challenges, Trump has vowed to bring these conflicts to an end.

For the sake of a more comprehensive global peace effort, it would be worthwhile for Trump to extend his focus to ending conflicts in Africa, particularly in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan. These regions hold vast reserves of critical resources—Congo with its cobalt and Sudan with its oil—both vital for sustaining global energy production and technological advancement.

Even before formally taking office, Trump’s aggressive rhetoric influenced global events. His warning that chaos would erupt if Hamas refused to negotiate a ceasefire prompted a temporary truce between Hamas and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). A pattern of strategic pressure appears to be emerging. After Trump excluded Europe from negotiations on ending the Russia-Ukraine war, French President Emmanuel Macron, a longtime acquaintance of Trump, was among the first European leaders to visit him in Washington, seeking clarity on France’s position in the shifting geopolitical landscape. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer soon followed, with Zelensky arriving thereafter.

Notably, Scholz maintained Germany’s trademark direct and pragmatic approach during his White House visit. Macron, having built a rapport with Trump during his previous presidency, engaged in lighthearted banter, reflecting the French leader’s personable style. Starmer, adhering to Britain’s tradition of diplomatic finesse, presented Trump with a letter from King Charles III, inviting him for a state visit—an overture that reportedly charmed the U.S. president. This diplomatic strategy was reminiscent of how North Korean leader Kim Jong Un had won Trump over with personal letters, following initial hostilities.

Unlike these European leaders, who carefully navigated discussions with Trump, Zelensky adopted a confrontational tone, attempting to lecture Trump on why defending Ukraine was also in America’s best interest. He argued that, despite the Atlantic Ocean separating the U.S. from Europe, Russia still posed a threat. However, Trump and Vance found this stance presumptuous and swiftly dismissed his arguments, reminding him that he was in no position to dictate U.S. security policy.

Zelensky’s misstep revealed his lack of diplomatic finesse, likely stemming from his inexperience—having transitioned directly from a comedian satirizing politicians to a wartime president. His extensive international support, largely driven by Western sympathy for Ukraine as the underdog in its struggle against Russia, may have inflated his sense of importance, leading him to expect universal backing. But Trump was not swayed by this sentiment.

The flurry of European leaders visiting Washington underscores Trump’s influence as a dominant global figure. While critics often overlook it, Trump’s approach is rooted in pragmatism and his commitment to his “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) agenda. His numerous executive orders are designed to strengthen the U.S. economy and give it an edge over competitors.

A key aspect of Trump’s legacy-building efforts is tackling the U.S. budget deficit, which currently stands at approximately $36 trillion. He is also seeking to reverse trade imbalances with major partners like China, Mexico, and Canada. One of his unconventional strategies to generate revenue is the significant increase in the EB-5 visa investment threshold—from $1 million to $5 million—offering a direct pathway to U.S. residency for high-net-worth individuals willing to invest in the country.

Similarly, his tariff hikes are aimed at shifting trade dynamics in America’s favor. These strategies are already causing ripples globally, sending shockwaves across markets and international relations. While some argue that Trump’s ambitious goal of attracting 10 million investors through the $5 million EB-5 visa is unrealistic—citing the UK’s modest intake of 1,000 applicants for its similar program—others believe the U.S. will draw significant interest, particularly from wealthy individuals in China, Korea, the Middle East, Russia, and even Britain.

For many affluent foreigners, the opportunity to secure U.S. residency through the “Golden Green Card” is worth the steep price tag. With Trump’s administration pursuing aggressive economic and geopolitical strategies, the global landscape is rapidly evolving—whether the world is ready for it or not.

A provision in the U.S. Constitution, which the new administration attempted to nullify through an executive order, was subsequently suspended by a court ruling.

Many may be surprised to learn that people worldwide already pay amounts equivalent to or even exceeding $5 million to participate in the U.S. citizenship-by-investment program. This is similar to how, in Nigeria, bureaucratic hurdles and corruption sometimes force citizens to pay up to four times the official cost to obtain an international passport. Likewise, visa application fees for certain countries are often inflated by syndicates, as seen in recent allegations against South African High Commission officials accused of visa racketeering.

The current $5 million fee is significantly higher than the original cost when the EB-5 visa program was introduced in 1990. To put this into perspective, the U.S. Congress initially established the EB-5 Program to stimulate the economy through job creation and foreign investment. In 1992, lawmakers expanded the initiative by creating the Immigrant Investor Program, or Regional Center Program, allowing investors to fund projects tied to designated regional centers that promote economic growth. While the program initially required a $1 million investment, this amount increased to $1.8 million in 1992 and has now been raised to $5 million under President Trump in 2025.

Critics who accuse Trump of being overly transactional for increasing the cost of the EB-5 visa may be unaware—or deliberately ignoring—the fact that he is not the first president to revise its pricing.

Following his tense meeting at the White House, Zelensky has shifted his tone, seemingly acknowledging the need for a more conciliatory approach. On Saturday, he issued a statement of appreciation, saying, “America’s help has been vital in helping us survive, and I want to acknowledge that.” He also emphasized the need for open dialogue, stating, “Despite the tough discussions, we remain strategic partners. But we need to be honest and direct with each other to truly understand our shared goals.”

At its core, Zelensky’s visit aimed to secure U.S. security guarantees against future Russian aggression. His skepticism toward any agreement with Moscow is understandable, given that Russia previously invaded Ukraine in 2014, annexing Crimea during President Obama’s tenure. Zelensky does not trust Putin, especially since Russia violated the 2015 peace agreement with Ukraine.

However, his confrontational approach—marked by emotional appeals rather than pragmatic diplomacy—worked against him. As a result, he left the White House empty-handed, failing to secure his key objectives, including a potential deal to trade rare earth minerals in exchange for U.S. military protection.

Zelensky has since sought solace among European leaders, but this offers little real security. Even those comforting him recognize their own vulnerabilities, as they, too, rely on U.S. military support. Despite Europe’s show of solidarity with Ukraine during a recent meeting in London on March 2—where they agreed to form a coalition—it remains clear that Europe cannot effectively defend itself without the United States. This reality, which became evident after World War II and led to NATO’s formation under U.S. leadership, remains unchanged.

Recognizing this, European leaders—including those from France, the UK, Germany, and Italy—have prioritized maintaining strong ties with the U.S., frequently traveling across the Atlantic to engage with President Trump, despite the turbulent state of their current relationship.

Trump has made it clear that he intends to end both the Israel-Hamas and Russia-Ukraine wars, possibly through unconventional means. In a phone conversation with Putin, he reportedly expressed no opposition to Europe deploying a peacekeeping force in Ukraine—a concept that closely resembles Ukraine’s original desire to join NATO, which sparked Russia’s invasion in the first place.

Strangely, this significant development has received little attention, with European leaders instead opting to continue funding Ukraine’s war efforts. The UK, for instance, approved a $2.8 billion loan to Ukraine just last Sunday, despite the reality that Ukraine is unlikely to achieve a decisive military victory, no matter how determined it remains.

Ultimately, the U.S. remains central to resolving these major conflicts in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. This reality must be acknowledged in any serious discussion about achieving lasting peace in regions where wars have left millions dead or struggling with extreme hunger.

Magnus Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, sent this piece from Lagos, Nigeria.
To continue with this conversation and more, please visit www.magnum.ng.

Continue Reading

Opinion

On the Suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan: A Grave Injustice and a Desperate Smear Campaign

Published

on

By

Leaderboard Ad

By Senator Ojudu Babafemi

The decision of the Nigerian Senate to suspend Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan for raising allegations of sexual harassment against Senate President Godswill Akpabio is deeply troubling and unjustifiable. While I take no position on the veracity of her claim, the fundamental principle of fairness demands that Akpabio should not have presided over a case in which he was personally implicated. It was his duty to step aside and allow his deputy to handle the matter impartially. By failing to do so, he compromised the integrity of the Senate and reinforced the perception of institutional bias against women who dare to speak up.

Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan is not one to be dismissed lightly. I had the opportunity to interact with her in an official capacity while serving in the presidency, and I can attest that she is a woman of immense strength, intelligence, and purpose. She is not frivolous, nor is she someone who can be easily intimidated. Her journey in Kogi State has been marked by monumental struggles and persecution, yet she has remained unwavering in her commitment to her people. Her grassroots connection is undeniable, and her dedication to uplifting her constituency is evident in her relentless advocacy.

Beyond the unjust suspension, what is even more disgraceful is the rash of hired protesters in both Abuja and Akwa Ibom, clearly orchestrated to malign her. These so-called protests are glaringly artificial, a poorly executed charade that insults the intelligence of Nigerians. It is evident to the world that these are not spontaneous expressions of public sentiment but paid theatrics aimed at discrediting a strong woman who refuses to be silenced. The fact that such desperate measures are being deployed only signals that someone has something to hide. This playbook is cheap, nauseating, and frankly, an embarrassment to any society that claims to uphold democratic values.

But history has shown that truth and justice always prevail. This suspension is nothing more than a temporary setback. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan will emerge from this even stronger, her resilience further cementing her place as a formidable politician and conscientious public servant. Meanwhile, those orchestrating this smear campaign will find their names recorded in the book of infamy—a stark reminder of those who stood on the wrong side of history.

Nigeria deserves a legislative chamber where justice is not only done but seen to be done. The Senate must correct this grave injustice and ensure that no lawmaker, especially a woman, faces persecution for speaking out.

Continue Reading

Trending

Close